Cap1 & CCA return

[alisindebt]

"If M&S were to rescind on any claim for payment then you may ask a court to repair your Credit File, but it's like getting the devil to believe in religion to get the CRA's to change their files."

 

Yes, I agree. Both CapQuest and Lowell's have had to drop their cases with me due to a missing CCA in one case and a prior dispute with the OC in the other case. Although they both sent letters confirming this, they still register a debt ti the DCAs. I saw on Experian that you can add a comment to explain a registered debt. However, when I requested that a short explanation be added to the two debts, it has all gone quiet, as Experian say they have to get permission from CapQuest and Lowells to do this.

 

I suppose they will not give such an undertaking to "punish" me for not paying them any money after they purchased the two alleged debts!

 

This system is a disgrace to our country where any DCA can say whatever they want about somebody on a register, even if they have closed the account as uncollectable. No other industry could do this.

[MAGDA]

"If M&S were to rescind on any claim for payment then you may ask a court to repair your Credit File, but it's like getting the devil to believe in religion to get the CRA's to change their files."

 

Yes, I agree. Both CapQuest and Lowell's have had to drop their cases with me due to a missing CCA in one case and a prior dispute with the OC in the other case. Although they both sent letters confirming this, they still register a debt ti the DCAs. I saw on Experian that you can add a comment to explain a registered debt. However, when I requested that a short explanation be added to the two debts, it has all gone quiet, as Experian say they have to get permission from CapQuest and Lowells to do this.

 

I suppose they will not give such an undertaking to "punish" me for not paying them any money after they purchased the two alleged debts!

 

This system is a disgrace to our country where any DCA can say whatever they want about somebody on a register, even if they have closed the account as uncollectable. No other industry could do this.

 

I agree completely, it is a disgrace. Our defaults are due to all drop off early next year, but one of our creditors (one with an unenforceable account and no agreement) has shown a default in August 2008, whereas it was actually 2004, so they have obviously changed the date. They seem to be a law unto themselves.

 

Magda

[Cristal]

If the debt was not sold, you will not require any notice of assignment as it has not been 'assigned' the agents are merely chasing as an agent.

 

As for the additional information you received about other clients I refer you to the wise man himself BF

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/222404-oh-dear-poor-debt.html

 

As for the application form, you need to inform M&S they are still in default of your CCA request using the letter from the Templates library and therefore the account will remain in dispute until it is supplied.

 

My only word of warning is that if you were to stop paying them on time this may be reflected in and may affect your Credit Files at the credit Reference Agencies which in turn could cause difficulty in obtaining credit. If M&S were to rescind on any claim for payment then you may ask a court to repair your Credit File, but it's like getting the devil to believe in religion to get the CRA's to change their files.

 

 

Thanks so much for clarifying all these points. Good to know that breaching the DPa will help someone, if not me!

[Cristal]

"If M&S were to rescind on any claim for payment then you may ask a court to repair your Credit File, but it's like getting the devil to believe in religion to get the CRA's to change their files."

 

Yes, I agree. Both CapQuest and Lowell's have had to drop their cases with me due to a missing CCA in one case and a prior dispute with the OC in the other case. Although they both sent letters confirming this, they still register a debt ti the DCAs. I saw on Experian that you can add a comment to explain a registered debt. However, when I requested that a short explanation be added to the two debts, it has all gone quiet, as Experian say they have to get permission from CapQuest and Lowells to do this.

 

I suppose they will not give such an undertaking to "punish" me for not paying them any money after they purchased the two alleged debts!

 

This system is a disgrace to our country where any DCA can say whatever they want about somebody on a register, even if they have closed the account as uncollectable. No other industry could do this.

 

 

If you look at posts 15706 and 15709, the suggestion is that, if the creditor is unable to produce a legit and signed agreement by you, then they do not have permission to pass your details to the CRAs (i.e, they are breaching the DPA). It's worth a try! CX

[alisindebt]

Well, that may well be the case, but does that stop them doing it anyway? Watch this space and let's see, as and when I get a reply from Experian, what these DCAs say, now that they admitted in writing that they have closed the accounts due to unenforceability.

 

I fail how to see how they can close an account under these circumstances but still report it to CRAs as a default.

 

It's the only industry that I know of that can do this.

 

For example, let's say that I lend you 20 pounds in the pub. Then I realise that I was drunk and I am not sure if it was you who I gave the money to and there is no documentary evidence. So I say to you, OK, I am wrong, the debt is not yours and I cannot recover it through court.

 

However, I am still going to record an adverse comment on your credit reference agency file.

 

You would say (insert a word of your choice) off!

 

But we have a system that actually allows them to do exactly this.

 

I should NOT be left in a position where it is, apparently my responsibility to fight to clear my name. It should be THEIR responsibility to do it immediately. What sort of system is this?

[lexis200]

Sorry if this has been said, but I've been off for a while and missed too many pages to check back!

 

One other possible avenue to try was regarding what happens when agreement ceases to be. It was an extremely interesting discussion which I very annoyingly can't actually remember the name of now...

 

Basically though the idea was that when you sign for them to process your data, it is only for while the agreement is live - you do not sign for them to use your info in perpetuity. So, going on from that, once they have terminated the agreement (which is where a lot of us are), they also lose the right to process your data. That agreement that you signed is now defunct, and whilst there will be a term somewhere that says you will still be liable to pay even if the agreement no longer exists, there is not one that says you will still agree to us using your data.

 

Therefore, once they terminate your agreement they no longer have a legal right to use/pass on your data, including passing it to CRA's.

 

All simple in theory, and it makes sense (to me anyway), but I don't remember if it had been tried - someone was working it out but I don't know how far it had got. It may be a possibility though?

[alisindebt]

Sorry if this has been said, but I've been off for a while and missed too many pages to check back!

 

One other possible avenue to try was regarding what happens when agreement ceases to be. It was an extremely interesting discussion which I very annoyingly can't actually remember the name of now...

 

Basically though the idea was that when you sign for them to process your data, it is only for while the agreement is live - you do not sign for them to use your info in perpetuity. So, going on from that, once they have terminated the agreement (which is where a lot of us are), they also lose the right to process your data. That agreement that you signed is now defunct, and whilst there will be a term somewhere that says you will still be liable to pay even if the agreement no longer exists, there is not one that says you will still agree to us using your data.

 

Therefore, once they terminate your agreement they no longer have a legal right to use/pass on your data, including passing it to CRA's.

 

All simple in theory, and it makes sense (to me anyway), but I don't remember if it had been tried - someone was working it out but I don't know how far it had got. It may be a possibility though?

 

Thanks for that very good news! If anyone can perhaps give a little extra information as to how we should get these entries removed from our CRA files it would be warmly received.

 

Having said this, i get the sneaky suspicion that they keep the CRA file "live" as a punishment-they purchased the debt and cannot collect and have therefore lost money. The law may say that they cannot make CRA entries, but they get away with it and they know it. It could cause a person all sorts of hassle to go to court to get entries removed. Sadly, this is the depth to which the DCA industry has fallen and time and time again they get away with it.

 

Why?

 

The regulatory bodies lack aggression and are controlled by politicians. Politicians are in the pockets of the banks or vice versa. How many senior cabinet and shadow cabinet officials get directorships at banks and financial institutions when they "retire" from politics.

 

In the USA credit card banks were top contributors to President Bush's 2000 election campaign. MBNA was ranked number 1, the largest donor and Citigroup (now owners of Egg) were number 10.

 

MBNA dropped to number 6 for thee 2004 Bush campaign but gave more money-more than $350000 (source "Debt Cures" by Kevin Trudeau, Equity Press, 2008, ISBN 13: 978-0-9798258-1-1)

Edited September 28, 2009 by alisindebt
Additional info

[vint1954]

"If M&S were to rescind on any claim for payment then you may ask a court to repair your Credit File, but it's like getting the devil to believe in religion to get the CRA's to change their files."

 

Yes, I agree. Both CapQuest and Lowell's have had to drop their cases with me due to a missing CCA in one case and a prior dispute with the OC in the other case. Although they both sent letters confirming this, they still register a debt ti the DCAs. I saw on Experian that you can add a comment to explain a registered debt. However, when I requested that a short explanation be added to the two debts, it has all gone quiet, as Experian say they have to get permission from CapQuest and Lowells to do this.

 

I suppose they will not give such an undertaking to "punish" me for not paying them any money after they purchased the two alleged debts!

 

This system is a disgrace to our country where any DCA can say whatever they want about somebody on a register, even if they have closed the account as uncollectable. No other industry could do this.

For a creditor to process your data, you need to give permission in writing. Try requesting such authority from your creditors and put CRA's to strict proof that they have acted within their duty of care in checking that the data entered against you is accurate.

[vint1954]

I agree completely, it is a disgrace. Our defaults are due to all drop off early next year, but one of our creditors (one with an unenforceable account and no agreement) has shown a default in August 2008, whereas it was actually 2004, so they have obviously changed the date. They seem to be a law unto themselves.

 

Magda

Fortunately not Magda,

 

One default per debt. They cannot issue twice. If the account has been sold, then the new owner needs to update the existing default.

 

I am sure that you will be on to them:D

[vint1954]

Sorry if this has been said, but I've been off for a while and missed too many pages to check back!

 

One other possible avenue to try was regarding what happens when agreement ceases to be. It was an extremely interesting discussion which I very annoyingly can't actually remember the name of now...

 

Basically though the idea was that when you sign for them to process your data, it is only for while the agreement is live - you do not sign for them to use your info in perpetuity. So, going on from that, once they have terminated the agreement (which is where a lot of us are), they also lose the right to process your data. That agreement that you signed is now defunct, and whilst there will be a term somewhere that says you will still be liable to pay even if the agreement no longer exists, there is not one that says you will still agree to us using your data.

 

Therefore, once they terminate your agreement they no longer have a legal right to use/pass on your data, including passing it to CRA's.

 

All simple in theory, and it makes sense (to me anyway), but I don't remember if it had been tried - someone was working it out but I don't know how far it had got. It may be a possibility though?

Hi Lexis,

 

That is my understanding also. While a contract is in place, both parties are bound by it. If one party backs out, they loose the protection of the contract, and may well fall foul of its conditions. They are not one sided.

 

The other argument is that they need to provide a signed copy of your authority to process your details under the DPA. No signed document no authority. I am about to try this, but need to do more research first.

 

In addition if the only signature they have is on an application form, it could be argued that they may only make enquiries and mark your credit file, in relation to the application only, not an ongoing regulated credit agreement? Applications are like a tender process, followed by a contract. The rules pertaining to the contract are in the signed contract, not in the tender.

[alisindebt]

OK, thanks for the opinions and input.

 

Is there a standard library/template letter covering this?

 

The reason that I am going back to earlier discussions in this thread, whatever the legal rights and wrongs of the situation, the DCAs seem to get away with saying whatever they want to the CRAs without any recourse.

 

It's a one way system.

[Enron]

Unfortunately the CRAs will always take the word of a creditor as gospel, and will not intervene where there is a clear dispute if you can illustrate it.

 

With relation to removing entries placed by a creditor who does not possess an executed agreement, I have a creditor who continued to enforce the agreement despite being in default of s78(1) CCA, whilst s78(6) CCA was in force they added unlawful interest, charges, late payment and default entered against my credit file.

 

Experian said that the creditor stated its entries were correct, and that was it, no room for movement, I am now getting towards the end stages with the ICO - and have clarified that I want the account returned to its lawful state, which would mean the removal of interest, charges, late payment markers and default. Though think we've got about as much chance of that, as Tesco's selling chocolate teapots.

Edited September 28, 2009 by Enron

[vint1954]

OK, thanks for the opinions and input.

 

Is there a standard library/template letter covering this?

 

The reason that I am going back to earlier discussions in this thread, whatever the legal rights and wrongs of the situation, the DCAs seem to get away with saying whatever they want to the CRAs without any recourse.

 

It's a one way system.

No specific letter. I am just starting down this road, so I will post one when finalised.

 

The problem is that not enough people complain or take them to task. Lets change that.

Edited September 29, 2009 by vint1954

[alisindebt]

My sentiments exactly, but a properly worded letter is required to make this effective and that is what I was eluding to.

 

You concluded that, "Though think we've got about as much chance of that, as Tesco's selling chocolate teapots."

 

In that case, who is in charge of regulating all of this, as it is clearly ineffective?

[pedross]

The Data Protection Act is a more powerful act than it gets credit for.

 

I am currently pursuing this route as a side issue and I am putting pressure on creditors to comply. I am getting an interesting response and will provide feedback if I feel that it will be useful.

 

In the meantime the posts by Lexis & Vint are very positive.

 

Pedross

[gezwee]

Joining in.........albeit 792 pages late but at least i get to see and join in with the latest views now...........evening to all

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi Pedross,

 

This is a very good point. Have you started a specific thread on this?

 

DD

[gezwee]

Sorry to butt in but........... anyone got any idea where my 'new thread' buttons gone?? Am I the only one or do others buttons disappear from time to time?

[pedross]

Hi Pedross,

 

This is a very good point. Have you started a specific thread on this?

 

DD

 

Hi DD

 

Thanks. But I do not have time to support my own threads at the moment even if I did know how to start one.

 

This is a very complex issue and one size really does not fit all. I started to post on another thread and it got really deep so I cancelled the post.

 

I will add my comments to posts as & when I have positive points to make.

 

Pedross

[hope6]

Please can someone help me having BIG problems !!! Firstly have received 4 credit agreements all are very different and really don't know were to start with them....

Also I have also received a N61 via Howard Cohen but they sent it to my Local Council Office and also The renenue Services WHY:shock:!!! I received a call from my Local Council Office to tell me that this had been sent to them and did I want a copy:confused:..... what is going on especially when I asked this company for my Credit agreement sending a £1.00 postal order and have yet not received a copy and this was back in January 2009.

[egg-sterminator]

Sorry for taking a deviation here since recent posts have been preoccupied with charge cards.

 

I recently posted that a previously and likely unenforceable agreement for a credit card with egg had been replaced with a loan agreement which was most likely enforceable.

 

Unlucky me most might say. I have paid most of the loan and therefore the card but I had one missed payment and they have deluged me at home at work , by email and the mobile by call, text, email, messages left with admin staff at work and so on. I am talking nearly seventy calls/emails/texts here. I have recorded two complaints pointing out s.40 AJA s.1 HA and s.127 CA and the calls have never stopped. In fact they have increased. Anyway I can deal with this aspect so no worries.

 

What I am really interested in is just how enforceable the loan agreement is. Since this paid off the card under what was probably an unenforceable agreement and since they have been plaguing me for next to nothing I'd really like to stick it to them.

 

So step wise is the following agreement enforceable? (This is for the loan). Looks to me like it is but I'd appreciate the opinion of someone who knows it is or isn't. This is not a get out of jail card. I'll carry on paying them nonetheless. If you really pee me off I'll go for and s77/s.78 on the original credit card agreement.

 

I just want to be sure of things if they start getting reallydifficult.

 

 

 

 

E is E cant seem to open files to look at agreement ?

[Desperate Daniella]

Hope,

 

Firstly you need to start a different thread for each agreement. Make sure you put the name of the bank/card company in the title and this will alert others with the same companies and you'll be able to share info and see where everyone else has got to. You can post up your agreement and we can have a look to see if we have got the same one and can help you.

 

I have absolutely no idea why Howard Cohen would send the N61 to the Council Office and Revenue Services. This is, I think, the form for an attachment of earnings after a judgment has been made (?) but if you have not received any court documents I don't know what they are playing at. I am not too up on data protection but would think they must be in breach of it, and of course they have caused you embarrassment which is against OFT guidelines.

 

I'm sure someone more experienced than me will come along and tell you what letter to write. Did they send covering letters to the IR/Council?

 

DD

[egg-sterminator]

surley even though the debt is still there but unenforcable means the account is continualy in dispute . Would that not mean under terms of CCA74 that no negative data can be issued with the Cra's and certainly if no doc exists with your signiture agreeing to this they are in breach of the D P act . Of course we know they will still do it perhaps the anwser is to flood the relative complaints bodies, target one at a time with masses of compaints said bodies would have to act .

Moving this to here as it seems more relavant . If you have good house insurance or maybe even car insurance, some have legal cover, may be worth seeing if they will cover this sort of thing . United we stand devided we fall ? can site team set up a complaints poll for the correct reg body ? thousands of complaints will have more impact than a few surely and only action is action . When their proformance figures look bad and questions are being asked of them as to why they seem unable to do their job correctly only then will they act .

[Desperate Daniella]

Hope,

 

Which four card companies are they?

 

DD

[andrew1]

It might be worth whilst on the subject of Defaults and credit reference agencies on this thread, to mention the Durkin case - it's a long read, but you can pick the jist up from the tail end...wrong credit info - big payout...worth a read anyway: Kinda puts these creditors on notice you know what you're talking about... RICHARD DURKIN v. DGS RETAIL LIMITED+HFC BANK PLC, 26 March 2008, Sheriff J K Tierney